UCL Discovery
UCL home » Library Services » Electronic resources » UCL Discovery

Allergy transcription before and after the implementation of an inpatient electronic prescribing system in a tertiary referral hospital: a case study in two oncology wards

Launders, H; Jacklin, A; Dean Franklin, B; (2015) Allergy transcription before and after the implementation of an inpatient electronic prescribing system in a tertiary referral hospital: a case study in two oncology wards. Safety in Health , 1 , Article 18. 10.1186/s40886-015-0010-5. Green open access

[thumbnail of Launders allergy transcription.pdf]
Preview
Text
Launders allergy transcription.pdf - Published Version

Download (361kB) | Preview

Abstract

Background: Patients with allergies can be protected from potentially life threatening harm by recording their allergen and reaction correctly. Electronic prescribing is being widely implemented with a view to improving patient safety; decision support functions can alert prescribers to the risk of prescribing an allergen. However the allergen must be correctly recorded to utilize this functionality. This study aimed to explore whether the introduction of an inpatient electronic prescribing system, in place of paper-based prescribing, has affected the accuracy of transfer of allergen data between hospital documentation systems. Methods: Retrospective case note review of a random sample of 100 patients admitted to two oncology wards in a UK hospital before implementation of electronic prescribing, and 100 admitted afterwards. We compared accuracy of allergy information transcribed from admission documentation to the inpatient prescribing system and then to the separate electronic discharge summary for paper-based versus electronic inpatient prescribing. We analyzed data separately for patients with no known drug allergy and those with a recorded allergen. Results: There was no difference between prescribing systems in the transfer of ‘no known drug allergy’ status from the admission documentation to the inpatient prescribing record. However transfer of ‘no known drug allergy’ status was better on electronic discharge summaries prepared from the separate electronic inpatient system (transferred correctly for 58 of 72 discharges, 81 %) when compared with paper inpatient prescriptions (26 of 68 patient discharges, 38 %) p < 0.001. For patients with an allergy the correct transfer of allergens from admission documentation to the inpatient prescribing record was lower for the electronic prescribing system (10 of 28 patient admissions, 36 %) when compared with paper prescribing (21 of 32 patient admissions, 66 %) p = 0.02. However correct transfer of allergen information from the inpatient prescription to electronic discharge summary was better with electronic prescribing, being transferred correctly in 68 % (19 of 28) patients compared to 38 % (12of 32) with paper prescriptions p = 0.02. Conclusion: Implementing inpatient electronic prescribing does not guarantee a safer system for patients with allergies. The usability of the user interface for allergen recording may be an important selection criterion when purchasing an inpatient electronic prescribing system.

Type: Article
Title: Allergy transcription before and after the implementation of an inpatient electronic prescribing system in a tertiary referral hospital: a case study in two oncology wards
Open access status: An open access version is available from UCL Discovery
DOI: 10.1186/s40886-015-0010-5
Publisher version: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40886-015-0010-5
Language: English
Additional information: Distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial 4.0 International License (CC-BY), as described at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. This license permits non-commercial use, including reproduction and adaptation of the article provided the original author and source are credited.
Keywords: Allergy, Electronic prescriptions, Electronic prescribing, United Kingdom
UCL classification: UCL
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Life Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Life Sciences > UCL School of Pharmacy
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Life Sciences > UCL School of Pharmacy > Practice and Policy
URI: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1476801
Downloads since deposit
131Downloads
Download activity - last month
Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads by country - last 12 months

Archive Staff Only

View Item View Item